Breitbart News Service: The New York Times reveals today--in a classic buried lede--that Harvey Weinstein's film about the killing of Osama bin Laden, set to air on the National Geographic Channeltwo days before the election, originally included a scene showing Gov. Mitt Romney "appearing to oppose the raid," a complete fabrication of history.
The film, SEAL Team Six: The Raid on Osama bin Laden, grants President Barack Obama a "starring role," and was edited--apparently at Weinstein's suggestion--to embellish Obama's involvement: "the film has been recut, using news and documentary footage to strengthen Mr. Obama’s role and provide a window into decision-making in the White House." The director claims, in his defense, that the edits reduce Obama's on-screen time.
The Romney scene was cut at the insistence of National Geographic Channel CEO Howard T. Owens, who told the Times: "We wouldn’t air this if it were propaganda." He explains the choice of the film's release date as merely the best chance to exploit its commercial potential.
Another controversial film about the bin Laden raid, Kathryn Bigelow's Zero Dark Thirty, which was produced in coordination with the Obama administration and using classified information from intelligence agencies, had its release date postponed until after the election.
Romney has pushed back throughout the presidential campaign against made-up charges by the Obama campaign that he would not have ordered the raid--a claim that has been debunked and widely criticized, not only for the substance of the charge, but for the political foolishness of the Obama campaign in making it.
Now that task has been outsourced to Weinstein, a devoted donor to Obama and other Democrats, who spent $2.5 million to acquire the rights to the film and shaped it to suit his political purposes and preferences.
The President hit Mitt Romney for flip-flopping today on the campaign trail in Iowa saying you can look at videotape of his past positions and not see flip-flops. The President, however, has engaged in his own of political gymnastics as well.
Obama today: I'm the same guy I was 10-12 years ago.
Obama in 1996: Answers a questionnaire and says he supports banning assault weapons, handguns. Obama 1996 Questionnaire Supporting Banning Hand Guns Obama in 2004: My religious faith dictates marriage is between a man and a woman, gay marriage is not a civil right.
Obama in 2004: We need to decriminalize our marijuana laws. In 2007 debate he said he opposed decriminalizing marijuana.
Obama in 2004: We need to end the Cuba embargo.
Via: washingtonindependent.com
Obama in 2004: Says he does not opposes cracking down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants
Luke Rudkowski attempts to question Obama’s Senior Campaign Adviser, Robert Gibbs on the Obama administration’s appeal to keep the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA. With no response about the NDAA, Luke later asks Robert Gibbs on how President Obama will defend having a secret kill list in the debates. Gibbs gives a standard response on the administration doing what it has to do to handle the threat of Alqaeda. Sierra Adamson then follows up by questioning if there is justification for killings such as Anwar al-Awlaki’s 16 year old son who was an American citizen, to which Gibbs lays the blame of his death on Anwar al-Awlaki not being a responsible father.
The West has been reluctant to openly arm the rebels
A senior Russian general has said Syrian rebels now have anti-aircraft weapons, including US-made Stingers.
Gen Nikolai Makarov was quoted by the Interfax news service as saying the origin of the surface-to-air missiles should be "cleared up".
Russia is the biggest supplier of arms to its Syrian government ally.
Aerial bombardment of rebel-held towns continued on Wednesday, as the UN's Syria envoy prepared to brief the Security Council on ceasefire efforts.
Lakhdar Brahimi has been trying to arrange a ceasefire between rebels and government forces over the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha, which begins on Friday.
Weapon supplies
"We have reliable information that Syrian militants have foreign portable anti-aircraft missile systems, including those made in the USA... it should be cleared up who delivered them," Gen Makarov told journalists in Russia.
There have been earlier unconfirmed reports of the Syrian opposition having shoulder-mounted missiles, but the West has been reluctant to openly arm the rebels.
In August, Syrian rebels said they had shot down a fighter jet near the border with Iraq.
Syrian warplanes have stepped up their bombardments of rebel-dominated areas in recent months, particularly in the north of the country. Deadly air raids are now daily events in towns around the city of Aleppo.
Recent footage has emerged of Syrian opposition fighters using old Soviet SA-7 heat-seeking missiles, which can destroy a plane flying at up to 14,000ft.
US-made Stinger missiles are shoulder-mounted anti-aircraft weapons designed to target low-flying planes and helicopters.
A US decision to supply them to the mujahideen in Afghanistan in the 1980s to fight the Russians proved to be a turning point in the war.
The UN says that more than 18,000 people have died so far in the uprising against Bashar al-Assad's government, which began in March 2011, but activists and opposition groups put the figure closer to 30,000.
October 25, 2012
By Jim Hoft The Gateway Pundit Go Tigers!
Clemson football fans cheered the US Constitution and booed President Barack Obama during the swearing in of ROTC recruits at Military Appreciation Day last weekend.
The college president was not amused. WYFF4 reported:
The president of Clemson University is chastising those who booed President Barack Obama during the college’s Military Appreciation Day at last weekend’s game.
During the university’s annual event that was held this year during the Clemson vs. Virginia Tech game on Saturday, a ceremony was held to induct ROTC cadets into the military.
The ceremony was disrupted by booing from some fans in the stands.
In an email with the subject line, “Dear Clemson Family: Focus on Positive Dialogue and a Civil Discourse,” Clemson University president James Barker addressed the behavior at the football game.
He wrote: “Saturday’s football game marked Clemson’s annual observance of Military Appreciation Day, a time when we pay tribute to veterans, men and women currently serving and those who gave their lives to protect us. Clemson has a strong military heritage, and this day is always a special occasion.
“Unfortunately, the day was marred by bad behavior from some fans. During the ceremony inducting ROTC cadets into the military, a number of fans booed during the section of the oath they take to obey the President of the United States.
Call a waambulance. The Clemson president’s feelings are hurt.
Massachusetts Democratic senate candidate Elizabeth Warren garnered a lucrative no-bid contract with the Clinton administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) one year after advising then-First Lady Hillary Clinton.
The Department paid Warren, a Harvard professor, $90,000 for serving as an expert witness over a five month period in 1999 and 2000, documents show.
That is an “oddly” large sum given the short time frame and the hourly pay rate DOJ pays witnesses, according to University of Minnesota law professor Richard Painter.
“That’s a whale of a contract,” said Painter, who served as chief ethics lawyer for the White House under the Bush administration. “Assuming she’s charging $500 an hour, which is a ton at that point in time, she’d have to work 180 hours on this one case to get up to $90,000.”
The lucrative contract came after Warren published a groundbreaking study into the impact of bankruptcy on women. She served through 1998 as an adviser on bankruptcy issues to then First Lady Hillary Clinton.
The contract was issued through the Department’s Civil Division in October 1999 and paid out in March of 2000.
Civil Division spokesman Charles Miller could not comment on Warren’s specific case, but said it is common for the Department to seek experts to testify on the government’s behalf in trial.
“We hire experts all the time, just as state governments and private practices seek out expert testimony,” Miller said. “Depending on what the case is, we choose somebody with expertise that is line with what the case that the government is presenting.”
Warren did not respond to requests for comment.
It is unclear what duties Warren performed for the DOJ, nor is it known what case she was working on.
The Department spent five months attempting to track down Warren’s records in response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee. It came up empty.
“The payment records only go back a few years, apparently because there’s so many payments they can’t keep all of them more than a few years,” said Civil Division FOIA attorney James Kovakas. “The focal point for the Civil Division’s record keeping is maintained in case files. Without a specific case, I couldn’t find the file.”
The payment records indicate that the DOJ did not seek competing bids for Warren’s contract. Such no-bid contracts are common when hiring expert witnesses, according to Painter, “because it’d look odd to a jury that your expert had to bid to testify.”
Warren’s legal consulting and lucrative expert witness contracts have become an issue in the Massachusetts campaign. Bloomberg reported in 2010 that a group of trial lawyers pursuing a class action lawsuit against banks paid Warren $90,000 to serve as an “expert witness” while she was monitoring the $700 billion bank bailout for the Congressional Oversight Panel.
Warren is running dead even with Republican Sen. Scott Brown in the Nov. 6 election.
Published on Oct 24, 2012 by ForyourInfoM
Donald Trump Offers President Obama's Charity 5 Million Dollars To Release His College Records
Donald Trump today pledged $5 million to a charity of President Obama's choice, provided the president makes public his college applications and transcripts and releases his passport history, a far cry from the October-surprise bombshell Trump had promised.
Calling the offer a "major announcement," Trump released a video via Twitter at noon to much ballyhoo, and his online followers grew by the hundreds in the moments before the video was released.
"I have a deal for the president," Trump said. "If Barack Obama opens up and gives his college records and applications, and passport application and records, I will give to a charity of his choice, a check immediately for $5 million.
October 25, 2012 The Blaze Is the man the Obama administration appointed on October 4 as key investigator for the terror attacks in Benghazi an Islamist-sympathizer? According to recently published reports, the new chairman of a State Department’s “Accountability Review Board,” which is heading the federal investigation into the Benghazi terror attacks, has been accused of being an “apologist for Islamic terrorism who has a cozy relationship with Iran.”
What’s more, the man in question — former Ambassador Thomas R. Pickering — has documented ties with the controversial group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR, of course, is a documented Muslim Brotherhood affiliate and was named unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial — the largest terror-funding trial in U.S. history.
To make matters worse, Pickering is also co-chairman of the board of George Soros’ International Crisis Group who has ties to other Islamic organizations as well, including the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), which has been described as pro-Iran “front group.”
NIAC lost what Matthew Vadum at FrontPageMag describes as ”an important defamation case in federal court last month in which it unsuccessfully argued the group was not a tool of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
Pickering, who is a member of NIAC’s advisory board, formerly served as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (1997 to 2000). He was featured in a report “Rise of the Iran Lobby,” by former CIA officer Clare M. Lopez, who was recently featured on the Glenn Beck Program to discuss the motivations behind the terror-attacks on the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi.
Pickering’s Islamic-connections came to light after a report by the Investigative Project on Terrorism was published, exposing what it called the “scores” of established, radical Islamists who met with senior administration officials over the course of hundreds of White House visits.
“Ambassador Pickering’s positions on Iran include calls for bilateral talks without preconditions and a plan for a multinational uranium enrichment consortium in Iran,” Lopez wrote.
As noted by Vadum, Pickering was, as of Tuesday evening, poised to participate in a panel discussion at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C., on “what role the faith community can play in fighting Islamophobia.” Along with Pickering, the discussion featured Arab American Institute president James J. Zogby, American Association for Muslim Advancement executive director Daisy Khan, and her husband, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who serves as chairman of the Cordoba Initiative. Vadum characterized Khan and Rauf as “prime movers behind the proposal to build a mosque near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan.” Further, he notes:
Khan is known for her over-the-top attacks on those who question the wisdom of building a Muslim holy site so close to the place where nearly 3,000 Americans were killed in an Islamist attack on the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.
Asked in 2010 if America was “Islamophobic,” Khan replied that “It’s not even Islamophobia, it’s beyond Islamophobia — it’s hate of Muslims,” she said.
Meanwhile Soros-funded organizations including the International Crisis Group are tirelessly working to champion the defeat of America’s alleged xenophobic bent and rampant Islamophobia. Perhaps there are no coincidences.
by John Guandolo Breitbart News Service Over the last several years, the presence of Muslim Brotherhood (MB) operatives working inside the federal government advising our senior leaders has been definitively documented (see articles here , here and here). This penetration of our system is shocking and constitutes an immediate danger for American citizens. The success of the MB’s influence operation from within our government is now manifesting itself with national and global implications for the security of America and its citizens. In July of this year, the CIA hosted a 2-day training program at its headquarters in Langley, Virginia entitled “Countering Violent Extremism Workshop for the National Capitol Region.”CIA Agenda
Present at this conference were local, state, and federal officials from nearly every law enforcement, military, and intelligence organization around the Washington Metropolitan area. In addition to the senior CIA, FBI, and DHS officials conducting the training, members of the Muslim community moderated and led the training throughout the 2-day program. Notable among these was Imam Mohammed Magid who participated in speaking about “Building Communities of Trust: A Local Example of a Partnership between the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) and Law Enforcement.”
How was Imam Magid vetted to speak at CIA Headquarters? And who vetted him?
The ADAMS Center is a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. It was founded by some of the most senior Muslim Brothers in the United States, to include Ahmed Totanji, who still resides in Herndon, Virginia. Its website proclaims “[ADAMS] is a membership organization registered in the State of Virginia as a non-profit, tax exempt corporation and is affiliated with the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).”
Imam Magid is the Executive Director of the ADAMS Center. He is also the President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the largest Muslim Brotherhood organization in the U.S. which was found to be a financial support entity for Hamas in the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial in U.S. history (US v Holy Land Foundation, Dallas, 2008). Having Magid advise and teach U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials can only be aptly described as insane. According to officials at Langley who were willing to speak on the condition of anonymity, this is an outrage - but none of the leaders on the inside seem to understand the gravity of this threat. To say the fox is in the hen house would be an understatement.
But the insanity does not end there. Imam Mohammed Magid continues to be a guest in the White House, works with the National Security Council, advises the Secretary of State, is on the DHS Homeland Security Advisory Working Group, and has received an award from the FBI. Magid continues to be treated by American leaders as if he is a friend, yet he is the leader of the largest MB front in the U.S. which financially supports the terrorist organization Hamas.
The question must also be asked – who vetted the other “leaders” from the Muslim community who moderated panels and led the training at CIA Headquarters? Are any of them Muslim Brothers or sympathetic to the MB cause?
When, over a long period of time, American leadership works side by side with and are advised by individuals and organizations who are proven to be hostile to the United States, it is no wonder the shooting at Ft Hood was called a “crime” by the FBI not an “act of terrorism” and why it was called “workplace violence” by Pentagon officials writing the after action reports. It is no wonder DHS and others in our government define the threat as “violent extremism” (which is actually a meaningless term) instead of calling it what it actually is – the Muslim Brotherhood’s jihadi movement in the United States which is a support network for terrorists. And, it is no wonder that a military attack by Al Qaeda on an American consulate in Libya would be identified by the Obama Administration as the result of a YouTube video which was “offensive to Muslims” instead of what it truly was. Sadly, the amazing heroism of the men who battled over 200 Al Qaeda fighters for 6 hours is getting lost in the shuffle.
Recently, Counter Terrorism Czar John Brennan scoffed at the idea the Muslim Brotherhood has penetrated the U.S. government. At what point will Mr. Brennan be held accountable for willfully failing to perform his duty and uphold his Oath to the Constitution. When will the other leaders such as the Secretary of State, the Director of Central Intelligence, the FBI Director, and the President be held to account for this egregious and treasonous behavior?
The National Security apparatus of the United States is deeply penetrated and is being dangerously manipulated by a hostile foreign threat. This necessarily means that significant foreign policy decisions involving the Islamic world will not only fail to achieve their intended outcome, but they will serve to advance the cause of our enemies.
One can only hope that a Romney Administration will take bold and decisive actions to purge the government of our enemies and those who willfully and unwittingly support them.
Michael Skakel, like uncle Ted Kennedy, was an early champion in the left's war on women...
Michael Skakel in court in Middletown, Conn., on Jan. 24, 2012.
A parole board in Connecticut denied freedom Wednesday to Robert F. Kennedy's nephew, Michael Skakel, who was convicted 10 years ago for the 1975 murder of his neighbor when they were both teenagers.
After a two-hour hearing, a three-person parole board read a unanimous decision: He will next be eligible for parole in 2017.
This was Skakel's first opportunity to seek parole from his sentence of 20 years to life since his 2002 conviction of the beating death of Martha Moxley, who was killed when they were both 15 years old in an exclusive neighborhood of Greenwich, Conn.
The murder occurred after Moxley and friends attended a Halloween party at the nearby Skakel home where Michael and his then-17-year old brother lived. The next day, Moxley was found underneath a tree in her family’s backyard. An autopsy indicated she had been beaten and stabbed with a golf club, which was found in pieces nearby. The club was traced to the Skakel home.
Due to a lack of witnesses and alleged bungling by investigators, the case went cold for many years after her death. A grand jury investigation reopened the case after the publication of books in the late 1990s on the unsolved crime, leading to the conviction of Skakel.
The victim's mother, Dorothy Moxley, spoke at Wednesday's hearing, saying that Skakel should serve at least 20 years in prison.
"Martha, my baby, will never have a life," she said, her voice breaking, according to The Associated Press.
Skakel has continued to claim he is innocent, and did so again during Wednesday's hearing at a McDougall-Walker Correctional Institution in Suffield, Conn.
"If I could ease Mrs. Moxley's pain in any way, shape or form I would take responsibility all day long for this crime," Skakel said, the AP reported. But, he added, "I cannot bear false witness against myself."
His lawyers say he has been a model prisoner.
"There has never been a person more deserving of parole than Michael Skakel," attorney Hope Seeley said in a statement to CNN on Tuesday. "His track record during the past 10 years shows the person we all know him to be — caring, generous, and committed to his faith, family and friends."
At very least, Skakel's attorneys have argued, he should have been tried and sentenced as a juvenile because he was only 15 when the crime was committed.
AP also reported that the chair of the parole board, Erika Tindill, said it was odd for Skakel to ask for early release while proclaiming his innocence.
A legal expert who spoke to NBC's Today Show earlier said that Skakel's release was unlikely in part because of Skakel's continued insistence that he is innocent.
"They're going to look at the impact on the victim and the victim's family," said David Schwartz. "They are going to look at whether Michael Skakel is remorseful and they are going to look at acceptance of responsibility. And he has none of that going for him."
Skakel filed an appeal of his conviction in 2010, arguing that his trial attorney, Michael Sherman, was incompetent, among other allegations.
The appeal hearing is slated to start April 15.
Reuters and The Associated Press contributed to this report. source
Guilford Co. voters say ballot cast for Romney came up Obama on machine
GREENSBORO, N.C. –The presidential election is just around the corner and voting issues have already become a problem in Guilford County.
On Monday, several voters complained that their electronic ballot machine cast the wrong vote. All the complaints were made by people who voted at the Bur-Mil Park polling location.
One of the voters, Sher Coromalis, says she cast her ballot for Governor Mitt Romney, but every time she entered her vote the machine defaulted to President Obama.
“I was so upset that this could happen,” said Coromalis.
Guilford County Board of Elections Director George Gilbert says the problem arises every election. It can be resolved after the machine is re-calibrated by poll workers.
“It’s not a conspiracy it’s just a machine that needs to be corrected,” Gilbert said.
After the third try, Coromalis says she was able to get her vote counted for Gov. Romney but was still annoyed.
“I should have just mailed it in,” Coromalis said.
Marie Haydock, who also voted at the Bur-Mil Park polling location, had the same problem.
“The frustration is… every vote counts,” said Haydock.
Elections officials say the machines have been fixed as of Tuesday, and no problems have been reported since.
Editor’s note: This exclusive report was originally posted at 12:35 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday, Oct. 24, 2012.
The son of Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va. – who serves as the field director for his father’s campaign – has been caught on video advising an undercover reporter how to fraudulently cast ballots in the name of registered voters by forging utility bills and relying on the assistance of Democrat lawyers.
James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, known for its hidden-camera probe of the controversial national community organizing group tied to Obama, ACORN, carried out the investigation and provided the video exclusively to WND.
UPDATE: After this story was published today, Patrick Moran announced his immediate resignation from the Moran for Congress campaign. Click here for details.
Jim Moran, 67, a controversial figure in Congress, has been criticized for his collaboration with Islamic leaders with ties to terrorism. In 2003, Moran, then a regional whip in the House of Representatives, was punished by House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi after he suggested Jews were responsible for the push for war against Iraq.
His son, Patrick Moran, was videoed by the undercover reporter Oct. 8 at the Cosi Restaurant in Arlington, Va., just across the Potomac River from the nation’s capital.
The Project Veritas video shows the undercover reporter posing as a citizen concerned that the Democratic Party might lose power in the upcoming Nov. 6 elections. The reporter explains to Moran that he had been apolitical but got his girlfriend pregnant and was concerned about the political threat to the funding of “reproductive services.”
The reporter, who approaches Moran at the restaurant, says he has a friend who found the names of 100 Virginia residents who have been registered the past three elections but have not voted.
Moran initially thinks the reporter’s intent is to offer the registered voters a ride to the polling place on Election Day to ensure they cast their ballots.
But the reporter states he and his friend actually want to vote in the name of the Virginia residents.
The conversation goes like this:
Reporter: There are 100 people who don’t vote. He’s looking for two guys to help him with. …
Patrick Moran: Crank it out?
Reporter: Yes. He’s got a van and he and me were going to go around. …
Patrick Moran: Rally these people up and get them to the polls.
Reporter: Well, he was actually going to get in a van and vote for them.
Patrick Moran: Ohhhh
Reporter: I know, but –
Reporter: It’s scary, but I’m not. … I don’t want to lose, and I’m frightened.
Patrick Moran: Yeah.
Later, Patrick Moran explains to the undercover reporter that new state voter ID laws will make his effort more challenging.
In Virginia, a new law requires identification but allows a broad range of forms of verification, including utility bills, bank statements and library cards.
Moran suggests creating fake utility bills to serve as voter ID. But he warns that there will be “a lot of voter protection” at the polling places to enforce the identification laws.
“So, if they just have the utility bill or bank statement – bank statement would obviously be tough … but faking a utility bill would be easy enough,” Moran says.
The reporter asks: “How would you do that?”
“I mean, I would just find, I don’t know,” Moran replies. “I guess. …”
“Microsoft Word and type it up,” offers the reporter.
“Yeah, something like that,” says Moran.
Moran emphasizes that the poll workers will be “trained up” on the new law to protect voters and “be cracking down.”
If there’s any trouble, he says, an Obama for America lawyer, or another Democrat lawyer, will be on hand to provide help, he said.
“You’ll have somebody in house, that if they feel that what you have is legitimate, they’ll argue for you,” Moran says.
But he warns the reporter that the utility bill has “got to look good.”
Later, at the Arlington County Democratic Party office, Moran advises the reporter to contact the registered voters on the list to make sure they don’t plan to cast a ballot Nov. 6. He suggests obtaining the information by posing as a pollster.
As WND reported, earlier this month O’Keefe’s team captured on video a regional director of the voter mobilization group launched by Barack Obama, Organizing for America, helping an undercover reporter vote for the president in two states.
This year, Project Veritas says it has been conducting an ongoing series of investigations in more than a dozen states “demonstrating the ease with which election fraud can be committed and legitimate voters can be disenfranchised.”
The group’s previous effort in Texas, New Jersey, New York and Connecticut shows Obama campaign workers, including Organizing for America Regional Field Director Stephanie Caballero, helping people who declare they want to commit election fraud. The investigation was inspired by a column by WND columnist Chuck Norris.
Caballero was fired shortly after the Project Veritas video was released.
Congressional sources tell Fox News that a top administration counterterrorism official was reprimanded by the White House last month after he testified that the Sept. 11 attack in Libya was terrorism.
The White House and the official are pushing back on the claim. But the allegation would appear to raise questions about recent administration statements that they were labeling the attack terrorism from the start.
Sources told Fox News that, in fact, the White House was unhappy with Matt Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, after his Sept. 19 comments, and told him to tone it down afterward.
Olsen had told a Senate committee, in reference to the four Americans killed in the attack: "They were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy."
It was the first time any administration official had publicly and directly labeled the attack terrorism.
Fox News was told Olsen's position was that he was laying out the intelligence as it was currently understood.
The White House, though, denied Olsen was reprimanded.
"This is completely false. The attack in Benghazi was clearly an act of terror, which is why the president referred to it as such three times before this testimony," National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor told Fox News. He was referring to Obama's statement on Sept. 12, and subsequently, in which he referred to "acts of terror."
A national counterterrorism official told Fox News that Olsen also denied he was reprimanded for his statements.
The claim further complicates the narrative about when the administration came to the conclusion that the attack was terrorism - let alone whether the attack was pre-planned, a matter that is still in dispute.
Before Olsen's Sept. 19 testimony, administration officials had avoided explicitly calling the attack terrorism. Asked about that label just two days earlier, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said: "I don't think we know enough. And we're going to continue to assess ... and then we'll be in a better position to put labels on things, OK?"
The White House on Sept. 20 used the term -- but then Obama, despite having referred to "acts of terror" earlier, declined to use any labels during an interview that same day on Univision.
Nevertheless, administration officials have since claimed Obama was calling the attack terrorism from the start. It was a point of contention during the second presidential debate, when Romney appeared taken aback as the president said: "The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people in the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror."
Moderator Candy Crowley backed up the president, though later acknowledging that U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice would later claim the act was a "spontaneous" reaction to a protest over an anti-Islam film.
The dueling public comments in the first two weeks after the attack continue to stir vociferous controversy on Capitol Hill. The latest development is the release of State Department emails that show top administration officials were alerted that a local militant group in Benghazi called Ansar al-Sharia had taken responsibility on Facebook and Twitter for the attack, hours after it happened. The same group later denied responsibility.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pushed back Wednesday on the suggestion that Sept. 11 emails implicating a militant group in the Libya consulate attack were proof of terrorist involvement, saying their claims of responsibility on Facebook and Twitter were not "evidence."
Though social media was vital in driving -- and monitoring -- the so-called Arab Spring that overthrew longtime dictators in Libya and other countries, Clinton dismissed it as an unreliable source after a series of internal emails sent by Clinton's State Department staff surfaced in which officials reported within hours of the attack that militant group Ansar al-Sharia claimed responsibility in Internet postings.
"Posting something on Facebook is not in and of itself evidence," Clinton said. "And I think it just underscores how fluid the reporting was at the time and continued for some time to be."
She suggested those producing the emails were "cherrypicking" documentation, as the White House noted the organization reportedly had denied responsibility in other settings.
"I think within a few hours that organization itself claimed that it had not been responsible. Neither should be taken as fact," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said.
But the group is a prime suspect. Indeed, one suspect in custody in Tunisia is a member of Ansar al-Sharia, one lawmaker told Fox News.
Three Republican senators, in a letter Wednesday to the White House, said they were "disturbed" by the latest email revelations, claiming it "adds to the confusion" about what the administration knew of the attacks.
"In television interviews nearly a week after the events in Benghazi, you yourself even refused to describe it as a terrorist attack, instead emphasizing the role played by a hateful video. This concerted misrepresentation of the facts of the case -- facts that, it appears, you and your administration possessed almost as soon as the attack began -- is why so many of our constituents are demanding a fuller explanation of why your administration responded as it did," wrote Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; John McCain, R-Ariz.; and Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H. They called on the president to "address the American people directly" on what happened.
Though the emails, obtained by Fox News on Tuesday, are just one piece of the puzzle, they reveal some of the most detailed information yet about what officials knew in the initial hours after the attack. And they again raise questions about why U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, apparently based on intelligence assessments, would claim five days after the attack that it was a "spontaneous" reaction to protests over an anti-Islam film.
Ansar al-Sharia is a group in eastern Libya that sympathizes with Al Qaeda. A member of the group suspected of participating in the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi has been arrested and is being held in Tunisia.
The emails obtained by Fox News were sent by the State Department to a variety of national security platforms, whose addresses have been redacted, including the White House Situation Room, the Pentagon, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence.
Fox News was told that an estimated 300 to 400 national security figures received these emails in real time almost as the raid was playing out and concluding. People who received these emails work directly under the nation's top national security, military and diplomatic officials, Fox News was told.
The timestamps on the emails are all Eastern Time and often include the subheading SBU, which is shorthand for "Sensitive But Unclassified."
The third email came at 6:07 p.m. ET and was sent to a different email list but still includes the White House Situation Room address and a subject line of "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack (SBU)."
"Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli," the email reads.
Earlier emails did not go into who might have been responsible for the attack.
The first email indicates that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and other personnel were "in the compound safe haven." Officials later discovered that Stevens and three other Americans had died in the attack.
The first email was sent at 4:05 p.m. ET with the subject line: "U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack (SBU)."
"The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack," the email reads. "Embassy Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.
"The operations Center will provide updates as available."
The second email came at 4:54 p.m. ET, with a subject line: "Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi (SBU)"
"Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response team is on site attempting to locate COM personnel."
The emails on the day of the attack further challenge not only the initial statements made by administration officials like Rice about the strike, but also recent claims that they were only basing those statements on the intelligence they had at the time.
State Department official Patrick Kennedy recently testified to Congress that anyone in Rice's position would have made the same statements about the attack being spontaneous.
But the newly uncovered emails clearly state the involvement of a militant group whose agenda is to establish an Islamic state in eastern Libya.
Despite this, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney backed up Rice on Sept. 18. He said: "Based on information that we -- our initial information ... we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video." Carney went on to say "that is what we know" based on "concrete evidence, not supposition."
Obviously not even sports heroes we once admired are immune to stupidity! Very sad indeed.... ESPN: Quarterback Cam Newton has come under fire this season as he and the Carolina Panthers have struggled. Hall of Famer Warren Moon says the second-year player is getting too much of the blame and claims there's a troubling racial undertone to the criticism.
"I think a lot of this is because so many people want to say 'I told you so' about him but couldn't because he was so good last year," Moon told Yahoo! Sports. "I think people are overreacting. How can he be a bust? He just had one of the great years a rookie has ever had, and now he can't play? Come on."
Newton has been a target of particular criticism for the visible frustration he sometimes shows during games and in his postgame news conferences. Panthers receiver Steve Smith even publicly criticized Newton for sulking on the sidelines during Carolina's lopsided loss to the Giants in Week 3.
Moon, however, said he is especially concerned because when Newton's demeanor is compared to that of other quarterbacks, it's often to other black quarterbacks.
"I heard somebody compare him to Vince Young. It's the same old crap -- it's always a comparison of one black to another black. I get tired of it. I get tired of defending it," Moon told the website.
"If you want to compare him to someone because of his demeanor, compare him to Jay Cutler. There are a lot of guys who whine and moan. Cam's not biting anybody's head off or pushing his linemen (as the Bears quarterback did during a Week 2 loss to the Panthers). He's just disgruntled, and not handling losing well, because, think about it, he basically didn't lose in college," Moon continued.
"I don't think Cam's as bad as Cutler, because Cutler looks like he doesn't give a damn sometimes, or he's yelling and cussing at someone. Cam, he just looks down when they're losing."
Moon, in an interview with ESPN's "SportsCenter" on Wednesday, said the quarterback Newton is most comparable to is the Steelers' Ben Roethlisberger.
Newton had a checkered college career before the Panthers made him the No. 1 overall draft pick in 2011. He was reportedly facing possible expulsion from the University of Florida -- he attended the school for two years, playing in one game in the Gators' BCS national championship season of 2008 -- for academic cheating, when he transferred to a junior college in Texas in the spring of 2009. From there, he signed with Auburn and had an outstanding, Heisman Trophy-winning season and led the Tigers to the national championship.
But Newton's time with Auburn was not without controversy. His eligibility came into question before the 2011 SEC title game when it was revealed that his father and a former Mississippi State player asked MSU for between $120,000 and $180,000 to play for that school out of junior college. Newton was cleared of any wrongdoing by the NCAA.
The Panthers are off to an NFC-worst 1-5 start that triggered the firing of general manager Marty Hurney on Monday. Moon said it's not Newton's fault that Hurney was fired.
"He's not picking the players. He's not playing defense. He's not calling the plays," Moon told the website.
Moon also criticized Panthers offensive coordinator Rob Chudzinski for changing the team's offense in a way that might hinder Newton's development. While Newton played in more of a pro-style offense last season, the Panthers, according to Moon, have switched to more of the read-option, which Newton ran at Auburn, and "it's backfiring."
Newton's quarterback rating ranks 23rd in the league, and there are 27 QBs who have thrown more touchdown passes than he has at this point of the season. Newton has just five touchdown passes -- with six interceptions -- and three rushing scores, one season after throwing for 21 touchdowns and running for 14 more. He is ranked 25th in ESPN's quarterback rankings with a Total QBR of 44.3.
After Sunday's loss he said he was going to "bring in a suggestion box" to try to find the answers to the Panthers' offensive woes.
Moon told Yahoo! that he plans to talk to Newton to "find out where his mind is."
"He'll fight through it. We're not even at the halfway point of the season yet, and everybody's throwing in the towel," he told the website. "He just doesn't like losing. Is that bad? No, but you can't show it -- not in this era where there's so much television coverage. You can't have a bad moment on the sidelines anymore. But if that's the worst thing he does, he's fine. That's fixable."
In a conference call with Chicago reporters ahead of the Panthers' game this week with the Bears, Newton said he hadn't heard about Moon's comments.
"I haven't heard anything that he's said, but obviously Warren is a person I go to and learn towards for guidance with leadership on the field and off the field," he said. "You know he's an avid person I might go to each and every day. I haven't heard the remarks that he's said but when it come to race and this game I don't think there is none at all. But I'm just going to continue to do the things that got me up unto this point and just try to focus on trying to win a football game."
As for his critics, Newton said, "I just keep living life."
"I understand I'm not perfect. I'm striving to be great," he said. "Whatever people may think or whatever other people might criticize me on, I take it for what it's worth but continue to try and make myself better each and every opportunity I get."
It's been said that America is an idea. That we are the "Great Experiment". To know who America truly is however, it is important to look at her foundation; Why were we built and how did we come to be? We need look not much further than to our founding documents- the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution to find that we are a nation founded on the principles of Freedoms given by God and Laws. Indeed the WHO of course is easily defined as the first 13 British Colonies, and today has expanded with 37 other states to become the 50 great states that we are today. The WHY we became a nation is explained in simplicity and is the purpose of that great founding document, The Declaration of Independence with its 5 short paragraphs and it's list of 27 grievances against the King of England thus begins:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
If the Declaration if the "Why" of America, then with certainty we can say that the Constitution is the "How" of America:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. So we see early on that laws were to be established by "We the People" and in 1789 the first 10 amendments were ratified known as the Bill of Rights. They include, and please note the order:
Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Amendment II A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Amendment III No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. Amendment VII In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Amendment VIIIExcessive bailshall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. __________________________________________________________________________________
But there are also philosophies set in our founding documents and between its lines that are as much about who America is, as anything else:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
__________________________________________________________________________________We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. _________________________________________________________________________________ And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. ___________________________________________________________________________________ May our Freedoms continue, may our ability to live under the laws of "We the People" and not "We the Government officials, who know better than you" continue. There are forces within and without that are trying to take away our freedoms, our Sovereignty and our very way of life. That exposure is the purpose of "Infiltrated Nation".
By Cliff Sims Yellow Hammer Politics Montgomery – In response to news that poll watchers affiliated with the United Nations will be sent across the country to monitor balloting in various states and search for evidence of “voter suppression” during the upcoming November 6 presidential election, Speaker of the House Mike Hubbard said he will support legislation in the next session requiring all poll watchers in Alabama to hold U.S. citizenship.
“The United States is the worldwide beacon of free elections and the Republican form of government, so having an international squad from the United Nations playing referee in our elections is insulting and absurd,” Hubbard said. “We’ve been holding elections in the U.S. for the past 223 years without the United Nations playing a role or enforcing the rules, and we certainly don’t want or need them now.”
At the request of several liberal-leaning groups including the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, a United Nations affiliate, announced it will deploy a team of poll watchers to polling sites across the country in order to monitor and document potential disputes.
The poll watchers will come from Serbia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Germany and France, and other countries.
Hubbard said he will push the law in order to ensure U.N. observers are blocked from future elections in Alabama by allowing only those who are U.S. citizens to be certified as poll watchers in the state.
“If you can’t participate in an election in the United States, and if you can’t cast a vote in the United States, you really have no business serving as a poll watcher in an election being held in the United States,” Hubbard said. “It’s bad enough that Alabama remains trapped under the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, so we certainly don’t need anyone from the United Nations coming into our state and meddling in our elections, as well.”
I have never entertained the idea that Obama was a Muslim and always believed he was a socialist. But Obama’s behavior over the last four years regarding Islam has convinced me that Obama has a Socialist/Islamic centered world view – a combination that is not uncommon in many parts of the Muslim world. Having been a journalist in Egypt for six years in the’70s, I have witnessed socialism with an Islamic twist to be a popular political ideology, especially amongst Arab journalists and intellectuals. Socialism and even communism have managed to survive in the ruthless Islamic political system as an alternative to full-fledged Shariah. The two ideologies blended together in the Baath Party in Syria, Iraq and socialist regimes in Egypt and Yemen. One major difference between the two ideologies is that Islam uses Allah, while socialism uses atheism, to fight the God of Christianity. Free democracies such as the United States are alien to Islam and socialists because they regard government as a servant to the people and believe that human rights are from God and not from government or Shariah.
Having said that, both Shariah and socialism united in their envy of Western society and needed to change it. That is when Obama became the savior of both Islam and socialism. He embodied both ideologies, socialism and Islam, and was groomed for years to help the socialist and Islamic causes inside America. The claim that Obama is a Christian was a silly joke, but a necessary lie for the greater cause of changing America to fit the goals of socialists and Islamists.
Obama became the one, the savior of both Islam and socialists. For that Obama had to deny who he really was. That is why Obama’s actions and words never added up. At the recent Catholic charity dinner speech, Obama did not seem just to be kidding when he said that Romney uses his middle name, Mitt, and “I wish I could use my middle name.” Obama was referring to his Islamic middle name of Hussein. In Obama’s mind he was not ashamed for having deceived America, but he blamed America for putting him in this quagmire of having to deny his true pride in his middle name.
That brings us to an important discovery by WND in an article by Jerome Corsi entitled: “Obama’s ring: ‘There is no God but Allah.’” The article shows close-up photos of a ring still worn by Obama today in the White House and that he has been wearing since his visit to Pakistan as a young man. The ring, which later also became his wedding ring, has very tiny and discrete Arabic calligraphy that means nothing to Americans, but to Arabic speaking people like myself and Dr. Mark Gabriel, means a lot. Such Islamic calligraphy is common all over the gold markets in the Muslim world. I am not a writing expert, but I can clearly see on the ring the word “La Ilaha IllaAllah.” Such a sentence in Arabic has a lot of the letters A and L, which in Arabic are simply a straight line like the number one.
Now, I am sure that Obama defenders will claim that the calligraphy design on his ring has nothing to do with Arabic letters, but that it just happens to be similar design of the Arabic Shahada. The ring is just another coincidence in the many coincidences throughout Obama’s life, just like his pastor, Rev. Wright, that does not express support to America, its Constitution or its Judeo/Christian heritage. Muslim or not, Obama has no problem misleading the American public by telling them he is a Christian when he is not, so why shouldn’t he tell them he is not a Muslim when he is?
For the sake of “hope and change” Obama found it convenient to say he is Christian. Obama would have better represented himself in the eyes of America if he was honest about his faith because lying about one’s religion is major deception and is not the everyday policy lies of politicians. The only religion on earth that advises its followers to lie about being a Muslim in a majority non-Muslim country is Islam. That adds to the suspicion about Obama, his faith and why he favors Islam so much. Lying for the purpose of jihad in Islam is also not only allowed, but an obligation to be proud of and a means to blame the enemies of Islam for one’s lies. Shariah law states: “Lying is obligatory if the purpose is obligatory.” Incidentally, Obama never criticizes Shariah and has people in his administration that defend Shariah. All of that take us to the same direction; why is Obama acting so much in favor of Islam?
That brings us to the current debacle in Libya, which can only be understood if we understand Obama’s worldview on the “the Muslim World.” Like the so-called “moderate” Muslims, Obama insists Islam has nothing to do with terrorism and blames previous American foreign policy and Israel for Islamic anger. Obama narrowed down the problem of Islamism to al-Qaida while embracing other Islamic groups as moderate, such as the Muslim Brotherhood. By doing that Obama dismissed the long history of terror of the Muslim Brotherhood, which gave birth to al-Qaida and hundreds of other terror groups. Nothing in Obama’s world is the fault of Islam, and that is why he ordered the Fort Hood massacre to be classified as workplace violence and not Islamic terrorism.
Obama believes that he uniquely understands the Muslim world and will bring a new era of peace with Islam, at least during his administration. There are also strong rumors in Egypt that when Obama met with the Egyptian foreign minister, he confided in him that he was a Muslim and that he would help the Islamic cause in America after he passed his health-care bill.
But as president of the United States, Obama was in a quagmire between protecting American lives and being loyal to Islam and appeasing his Islamic friends. Placing American Marines in U.S. consulates in dangerous terror-infested Islamic countries was going to jeopardize a bloody confrontation between American security and Islamists. That was also going to discredit Obama’s theory of Islam having nothing to do with terrorism. Also, if Obama were to confront militarily Muslim jihadists in Islamic countries, his whole theory that he has brought a new page in American/Islamic relations would fall apart and he would be no different from his predecessors, Bush or Reagan.
That explains why the demands for American security instead of Libyan security by U.S. Ambassador Stevens went unanswered. Obama did not want to deal with the possibility that American Marines would shoot at Muslim attackers to save American lives.
Whether Obama secretly considers himself Muslim or not, his suspicious behavior in Libya supports those who believe he is a Muslim. According to Shariah, it is a capital crime for a Muslim individual or leader to shoot Islamists for the purpose of protecting Americans. That would make Obama a violator of Shariah and an apostate. Obama in Libya acted like he does not want to upset Muslims, and that he does not want to shoot on Muslim attackers. That is why he opted for the lesser of the two evils, to get Muslims, Libyan security, to guard the embassy and this way, it will be Muslims who will have to shoot other Muslims to defend the consulate. But that plan was useless because even the Muslim guards had to follow Shariah and ran away and left the Americans to be killed rather than violate Shariah themselves and kill other Muslims.
Muslim or not, Obama gambled with the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others and left them as sacrificial lambs rather than engage in fire exchange between American security and Muslim attackers. And until today, the murder of the Americans at the hand of Muslims did not get us an apology from any Muslim leader or cleric. No one is taking responsibility, not even Obama.
With the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Islamists and jihadists made it clear to us that they couldn’t care less about Obama, his appeasement, his apology and even his Islam. They could not put on hold their jihad or restrain themselves for an American president who wanted to help build a better image of Islam to the world. They could not play the game with Obama and refrain from jihad even during the Obama presidency. Jihadists declared that Obama, Muslim or not, is just another American president who should not be trusted. The Muslim world has no respect for authority or the rule of law and that is what Islamic Shariah produces in all Muslim countries and that is why Islamic angry mobs recently were torching Obama’s effigy in anger.
It is unfortunate that it took a tragedy in Libya and the lives of decent Americans to prove that Obama is unfit to be president. Obama has fooled many Americans for four years, and that is why when he sees the face of Romney he is reminded of a reality he could not fully eliminate. Obama knows the game is over and his presidency is over. Nonie Darwish is the author of “Cruel and Unusual Punishment” and “The Devil We Don’t Know” and president of Former Muslims United.
“How was it that HillStone, a newcomer in the business of home building, landed a massive and potentially lucrative contract to build 100,000 homes in war-torn Iraq?
Richter didn’t mince words. It really helps, he said, to have “the brother of the vice president as a partner,” according to a person who was present.
The “brother” Richter was referring to during the meeting is James Biden, the younger brother of Vice President Joe Biden.
Since November 2010, James Biden has been the executive vice president of Hill International’s housing subsidiary despite little if any documented work history in residential construction. And if the company’s projections are accurate, both Hill and Biden are on the verge of a huge payday, beneficiaries, some analysts believe, of James Biden’s connections to the Obama Administration through his older brother.
…..
It’s Not What You Know But Who You Know
Still, Richter concedes that the Obama Administration has played a role in landing the assignment for Hill—and that James Biden’s political skills often come in handy. ………
But (James Biden’s)bio cites no specific business-related post that he has held in the past, though it says that at “the age of 22, (James) Biden was the finance chairman of his then 29-year-old brother’s bid for a U.S. Senate seat in Delaware and successfully enlisted the support of national unions, political leaders and financiers across the country.”
James Biden, for his part, declined repeated attempts by FOX Business to comment on Iraq and his larger role at Hill, which now includes selling affordable housing developments, particularly in third-world countries. Press officials for Vice President Biden didn’t respond to an email or a telephone call for comment.” READ THE FULL STORY>>
